Periodic Reporting for period 1 - SQoL (School for Quality of Life. Policy, practice and theory for a quality of life approach in Europeanschool systems.)
Reporting period: 2018-07-01 to 2020-06-30
The main research question of the project is: What is the role of Quality of Life (QoL) movement - in particular policies, theories and practices – in education system and how can a School for Quality of Life (SQoL) model be? The hypothesis is that QoL initiatives, which are still fairly new, will soon begin to influence European educational systems. My overall objective is to map and critically analyse the impact of such policies on the educational system and provide a School for Quality of Life (SQoL) model.
This project is highly relevant for society because it tackles a crucial issue related to the ongoing systemic transition from the industrial model of human development to a post-industrial model strongly based on sustainability and quality of life. This project is among the firsts, if not the first, to provide a solid analysis of the impact of the ‘QoL Initiatives’ on European education systems and to provide a framework for an informed model of SQoL. The innovative aspects of the research program lie in: a) the novelty of the topic itself, indeed the ‘QoL Initiatives’ emerged only recently, b) the absence of their educational counterpart despite the fact that it is highly relevant and needed, c) the construction of the theoretical pedagogical model to support a second phase of implementation ‘on-the-field’ with schools and students’ communities.
The overall research objectives are:
a) mapping and analysing the relevance and impact of national (Danish and Italian) and transnational (EU, UN, OECD) QoL policies on education systems;
b) mapping and analysing national (Danish and Italian) and transnational (‘European Sustainable Development Network-ESDN’) best practices that incorporate QoL approach into the school system, including teachers’ professional development;
c) theoretical analysis of the key concepts related to the QoL initiatives – e.g. happiness, wellbeing, quality of life – to clarify terminological confusion as well as to operationalize and theoretically ground the most appropriate concepts to define and design a School for Quality of Life model (SQoL) by integrating collected data, defining key concepts and theoretically grounding it.
This project is highly relevant for society because it tackles a crucial issue related to the ongoing systemic transition from the industrial model of human development to a post-industrial model strongly based on sustainability and quality of life. This project is among the firsts, if not the first, to provide a solid analysis of the impact of the ‘QoL Initiatives’ on European education systems and to provide a framework for an informed model of SQoL. The innovative aspects of the research program lie in: a) the novelty of the topic itself, indeed the ‘QoL Initiatives’ emerged only recently, b) the absence of their educational counterpart despite the fact that it is highly relevant and needed, c) the construction of the theoretical pedagogical model to support a second phase of implementation ‘on-the-field’ with schools and students’ communities.
The overall research objectives are:
a) mapping and analysing the relevance and impact of national (Danish and Italian) and transnational (EU, UN, OECD) QoL policies on education systems;
b) mapping and analysing national (Danish and Italian) and transnational (‘European Sustainable Development Network-ESDN’) best practices that incorporate QoL approach into the school system, including teachers’ professional development;
c) theoretical analysis of the key concepts related to the QoL initiatives – e.g. happiness, wellbeing, quality of life – to clarify terminological confusion as well as to operationalize and theoretically ground the most appropriate concepts to define and design a School for Quality of Life model (SQoL) by integrating collected data, defining key concepts and theoretically grounding it.
The work performed during the project consisted mainly in data collection, quali-quantitative data analysis, and theoretical elaboration of empirical results. The work was divided in three work-packages, of which the Work Package 1 was dedicated to “General Scientific Training and Candidate Commitments”. This work package dealt with the beginning and end of the project setting and therefore with organizational, managerial and training issues. Work package 2 dealt with “Policies and Theories”. This work package focused on the theoretical background of the QoL discourse and the most prominent QoL initiatives and policies. Work Package 3 was dedicated to “Best practices”. This work package focused on best practices in Italy, Denmark, and Europe.
Main results are:
• Historical placing of QoL movement: QoL movement is a visible and an unprecedented mark of the ongoing transition in macro human systems from industrial to post-industrial development model.
• QoL offers a new narrative mainly based on overcoming a purely economic approach to human development (the so-called “Beyond GDP”). However, from our analysis it emerges clearly that the QoL movement (and indexes) are still largely based on economic assumptions and language. A translation of QoL movement into education systems’ policies should pay attention to this issue to avoid economic colonization of education sector.
• As for now, the QoL movement has no formal, large, and direct initiatives in the education sector. Initiatives in this direction are envisaged and the academic reflection is ongoing. The SQoL model developed for this project is a first contribution in this direction. Indirect and national/local initiatives have been started recently (e.g. in Italy).
• The OECD Pisa Initiative, one of the larger student assessment initiative in the world, has recently inaugurated Pisa Wellbeing Initiative in order to measure students’ wellbeing on a large-scale. Such initiative only partially refers to the paradigm of the QoL movement. However, the study of the dynamics of Pisa Wellbeing policies reveals a transition from the Positive Psychology and cognitive neuroscience discourses as main references to the sustainable wellbeing and QoL narrative.
• The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the sustainable development movement are converging towards the QoL movement on a common narrative (e.g. sustainable wellbeing; sustainable quality of life) and this could have massive repercussions on education systems. The conjunctions of the two areas are under investigation at Italian Alliance for Sustainable Development- ASviS in Rome (secondment institution).
• ASviS probably represents today the best example in Europe of an institutional agent capable to carry forward educational policies and practices directly derived from the QoL movement. The Danish education systems, instead, at the moment is still mainly based on the health-related conception of wellbeing.
• Historical, conceptual, and methodological maps of QoL movement reveal theoretical and terminological confusion due to the attempt to be inclusive of many different and sometimes contradictory discourses on wellbeing and quality of life (e. g. tautological definitions, lack of etymological analysis).
Main results are:
• Historical placing of QoL movement: QoL movement is a visible and an unprecedented mark of the ongoing transition in macro human systems from industrial to post-industrial development model.
• QoL offers a new narrative mainly based on overcoming a purely economic approach to human development (the so-called “Beyond GDP”). However, from our analysis it emerges clearly that the QoL movement (and indexes) are still largely based on economic assumptions and language. A translation of QoL movement into education systems’ policies should pay attention to this issue to avoid economic colonization of education sector.
• As for now, the QoL movement has no formal, large, and direct initiatives in the education sector. Initiatives in this direction are envisaged and the academic reflection is ongoing. The SQoL model developed for this project is a first contribution in this direction. Indirect and national/local initiatives have been started recently (e.g. in Italy).
• The OECD Pisa Initiative, one of the larger student assessment initiative in the world, has recently inaugurated Pisa Wellbeing Initiative in order to measure students’ wellbeing on a large-scale. Such initiative only partially refers to the paradigm of the QoL movement. However, the study of the dynamics of Pisa Wellbeing policies reveals a transition from the Positive Psychology and cognitive neuroscience discourses as main references to the sustainable wellbeing and QoL narrative.
• The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the sustainable development movement are converging towards the QoL movement on a common narrative (e.g. sustainable wellbeing; sustainable quality of life) and this could have massive repercussions on education systems. The conjunctions of the two areas are under investigation at Italian Alliance for Sustainable Development- ASviS in Rome (secondment institution).
• ASviS probably represents today the best example in Europe of an institutional agent capable to carry forward educational policies and practices directly derived from the QoL movement. The Danish education systems, instead, at the moment is still mainly based on the health-related conception of wellbeing.
• Historical, conceptual, and methodological maps of QoL movement reveal theoretical and terminological confusion due to the attempt to be inclusive of many different and sometimes contradictory discourses on wellbeing and quality of life (e. g. tautological definitions, lack of etymological analysis).
Due to the novelty of the topic, the quali-quantitative approach adopted and the lack of literature about QoL movement and its impact on education systems, this project represents a massive step forward compared to the state of the art. In particular, the following issues are relevant in terms of socio-economic impact and the wider societal implications of the project:
a) While the “Beyond GDP” movement is entering a more consolidated phase, its educational counterpart is still in the initial phase and needs a clear and deep vision, which our project and its results can assure. We are able to provide support to school leaders and policy makers willing to move beyond standard approaches to wellbeing in schools, such as “positive psychology” and “psychophysical wellbeing”, which tend to be mainly focused on individual and/or medical dimensions. Instead, we can provide a pedagogical model to implement a socio-economic approach to quality of life based on embodied and systems theory. Such model allows a more systemic approach to school policies and initiatives, and provides a critical global view on the impact of ongoing structural socio-economic transitions on the education sector.
b) Our pedagogical model can now support implementation activities on the field, in particular with schools and students’ communities, e.g. autonomous groups of students elaborating new and more inclusive indexes to measure quality of life. This can have interesting societal implications because it will support bottom-up construction of quality of life indexes, which promote students’ agency and ethical responsibility, instead of the top-down indexes proposed by the QoL movement.
a) While the “Beyond GDP” movement is entering a more consolidated phase, its educational counterpart is still in the initial phase and needs a clear and deep vision, which our project and its results can assure. We are able to provide support to school leaders and policy makers willing to move beyond standard approaches to wellbeing in schools, such as “positive psychology” and “psychophysical wellbeing”, which tend to be mainly focused on individual and/or medical dimensions. Instead, we can provide a pedagogical model to implement a socio-economic approach to quality of life based on embodied and systems theory. Such model allows a more systemic approach to school policies and initiatives, and provides a critical global view on the impact of ongoing structural socio-economic transitions on the education sector.
b) Our pedagogical model can now support implementation activities on the field, in particular with schools and students’ communities, e.g. autonomous groups of students elaborating new and more inclusive indexes to measure quality of life. This can have interesting societal implications because it will support bottom-up construction of quality of life indexes, which promote students’ agency and ethical responsibility, instead of the top-down indexes proposed by the QoL movement.